Skip to content

Final Assessment - October 2016 - ACOG District II Annual Meeting

Final Assessment - to be completed at conclusion of meeting

The ACOG District II 2016 Annual Meeting provides the opportunity to facilitate the professional development of women’s health care professionals by offering a scientific program designed to provide comprehensive clinical skills-based education.

District II’s mission is to provide its members with the latest skills, knowledge, and resources to offer the highest quality health care for women.

Please complete this Final Assessment to help inform future programming. Once completed, you will be redirected to print out your CME certificate. 
1.Victor R. Cotton, MD, JD
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
2.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
3.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
4.Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD, FACOG, NCMP
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
5.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
6.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
7.John P. Curtin, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
8.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
9.Raymond Sandler, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
10.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
11.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
12.Loraine O'Neill, RN, MPH
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
13.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
14.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
15.Christine Herde, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
16.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
17.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
18.Maura Reinblatt, MD, FACS
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
19.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
20.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
21.Peter Bernstein, MD, MPH, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
22.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
23.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
24.Dena Goffman, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
25.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
26.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
27.Mary E. D'Alton, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
28.Disclosed whether or not a relationship with industry exists
29.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
30.Roberto Romero, MD, D.Med.Sci., FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
31.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
32.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
33.Ted L. Anderson, MD, PhD, FACOG, FACS
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
34.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
35.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
36.Helen Feltovich, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
37.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
38.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
39.Barbara S. Levy, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
40.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
41.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
42.Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
43.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
44.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
45.Michael Brodman, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
46.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
47.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
48.Arthur A. Gianelli, MA, MBA, MPH
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
49.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
50.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
51.Sandra Myerson, MBA, MS, BSN, RN
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
52.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
53.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
54.John T. Queenan, Jr., MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
55.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
56.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
57.Tom Bourne, Ph.D, FRCOG, FAIUM (hon.)
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
58.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
59.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
60.Joanne Stone, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
61.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
62.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
63.Cynthia Gyamfi-Bannerman, MD, FACOG
1 (poor)
2
3
4
5 (excellent)
Was understandable (speed, diction, volume)
Kept within time limits
Made no inappropriate remarks
Appeared not to have a commercial bias
64.Disclosed whether or not relationship with industry exists
65.Would you like to hear this speaker again?
66.This program was:
67.The entire program...
1 (strongly disagree)
2
3
4
5 (strongly agree)
Was well-organized
Was consistent with course objectives
Allowed sufficient time for discussion
Adhered to printed meeting schedule
Meeting facilities were conducive to learning
68.Final program grade (5 = best score)
69.The hotel facilities
1 (very dissatisfied)
2
3
4
5 (very satisfied)
How satisfied were you with this facility?
How satisfied were you with the cost of this facility?
70.Preferred topics for future courses (indicate if of interest to you):
71.What is your preferred meeting site? (indicate one)
72.What is your preferred meeting region?
73.What are the factors influencing your choice?
Yes
No
Hotel costs
Course content
Availability of direct transportation
Facilities for family
74.Preferred meeting days: the meeting should start on...
75.COMMENTS: If you have comments on any aspects of this program that were not covered by this evaluation, please write them within this box.